متن زیر برگرفته از پست دکتر بصیر در گروه دندونر فیسبوک از دوستان خوب من که در دانشگاه هاروارد مشغول گذروندن دوره پریو هستند، گرفته شده که بدلیل مفید بودن در این وبلاگ اضافه شده. این متن برگرفته از سایت انجمن تخصصی پریودنتولوژی آمریکا و خطاب به مدیران گروه پریو آمریکا نوشته شده:
Best Practices in Selecting Residents: 2014 AAP Postdoctoral Educators Workshop Outcomes
Faculty and Dean Recommendation Letters:
Most, if not all educators will not write a negative letter for fear of legal reprisals. Thus, recommendation letters may all seem to look alike and state that the candidate should be considered. This is not always the case however, and recommendation letters can be decoded by reading between the lines, talking with faculty who wrote the letters and assessing which faculty did not write letters. Directors should consider the following variables when reading recommendation letters:
Who wrote the letter and the extent of details
• Who the letter is written by
• How long and how well they know the candidate
• Letters that are not included, but probably should be (i.e. from the clinical coordinator)
• Assess the overall mix of letter writers
• Honest and genuine writing with a narrative of candidate accomplishments such as:
o Honors courses
o Commendations or awards
o The candidate’s demonstrated interest in periodontics
o Whether there is a balance of positive and potential concerns
o Leadership and community service activities
o Research experience
o Non-boilerplate closing recommendation with an overall assessment

Look for questionable comments:
Most candidates will ask those educators whom they know will write “good” letters, and some educators will write letters for those they are unsure as to whether they would succeed and make excellent specialists. Therefore, scrutinizing the letter is a must and directors should look for the following information:
• Consider the amount of detail about the candidate’s work and accomplishments
• Determine whether the letter is bland and boring or enthusiastic and passionate
• What is NOT stated in the letter is most important
• Compare letters written by the same educator who recommended different candidates;
does one letter speak louder than the next?
Below is a list of possible comments that could be viewed as highest recommendations to lowest. These comments are not representative of what any institution does, or should do.
1. Enthusiastically recommend and without reservation
2. Highly recommend
3. Recommend
4. Request fullest review
Comments such as these may be coupled with phrases like these:
1. Outstanding candidate
2. Outstanding academic record
3. Demonstrated leadership
4. Commitment to community service
5. Overcome obstacles
Additional comments and possible interpretations:
1. I give my highest recommendation – the candidate is outstanding and will make an
excellent specialist
2. I strongly/highly recommend – the candidate is good and would most likely make an
excellent specialist
3. I recommend – the candidate is so-so and may struggle in specialty training
The most common words directors search for in these letters, according to the AAP survey are: excellent, teachable, responsible, outstanding clinician, work ethic, team player, productive, communicative, and sincere.
Source: www.perio.org